Social Buttons

Friday, February 10, 2017

In Context: Escaped Alone

Playwright Caryl Churchill returns to BAM for the first time in 15 years with this by-turns hilarious and unsettling daydream directed by frequent collaborator James Macdonald. Context is everything, so get closer to the production through our series of curated links, videos, and articles. After you've attended the show, let us know what you thought by posting in the comments below and on social media using #EscapedAlone.

While Churchill never grants interviews, director James Macdonald does, even if, as he puts it, “I don't have anything I need to express about myself. My job is to enable other people to express themselves.”

I agree. This was perhaps the worst production I have seen at BAM. The acting was very off-putting, no chemistry between the women whatsoever. Today, I believe is their last day and they do need to go home: they were tired and boring. If there was a directorial POV, it was not at all clear. The script had potential but was totally unrealized. Less than an hour for $64 - BAM should be ashamed.

This appeared to be all that the raves say. The set is set back and the sound didn't carry all that well to the balcony. The laughter was for the most part in the orchestra. The charming accents also got in the way of processing the flow of the piece. But we were able to follow the gist, understand the horror described, and got some laughs.

We loved it! Thank you BAM for presenting one of the best things we've ever seen. It was so surreally good, and we came away better for having experienced the drama and excitement contained within this play. Something very touching about these ladies and how they, we, all live with the threat of an "Apocalypse." Hate to be political but one can't help but think of you know who. Keep it up. We will be back for more such as this.

I'm sorry I didn't buy a copy of the play and read it first as the accents made it difficult to follow. I am a big fan of Churchill's plays, having seen many but this one was not to my liking. I did like the staging; the four women.

We were lucky (apparently); we were sitting in the front. They actually SLOWED the cadence of the Brit-speak, finishing each others' sentences. And the written piece may be a matter of taste. We loved it. Given the surreal content, I found it closer to Beckett than Pinter. But best in that may be the multiple levels - ordinary ("what's for tea?") speech, deep personal confessions and confrontations (as if they were in that same ordinary world), and the Apocalyptic descriptions that seem to haunt us all now. For me, it reflected the whole of our thought. Thanks Caryl!

I went to see Escaped Alone yesterday and thoroughly enjoyed it. I love all the actors and was not disappointed. Accents difficult to understand? Well, admittedly I am British but they were perfectly normal accents so I don't understand any difficulty. We don't all speak like on Downton Abbey if that was what people were expecting. I sat in the 4th row which was amazing so no difficulty with sound. It was a bit expensive for just under an hour but that was clear when I made my booking. I traveled by train from Boston just to see this play and I am very happy that I did.

I agree with many of the other commenters: the play has to be performed in a much smaller venue. (We sat in the rear of the orchestra.) One of the actors had a small voice, the narrator didn't project well (voice swallowed in her throat), although I liked what I managed to hear. And of course the accents lent an additional burden for an American audience.

Sat in the last row of the Balcony and I heard every word. I actually found the cadence a bit slow, which made it seem less natural. Sadly, did not enjoy the play at all. Really seemed like it was trying too hard to be something meaningful. Left feeling disappointed.

Really enjoyed it. Though I too had some difficulty in hearing/understanding the speech. It packs a wallop in very short time. The outward ordinariness of our lives versus the tortured interiors and the possibility of an apocalypse at any moment.

Agree with all the posters commenting on how difficult it was to hear. We were first row balcony, which should be pretty prime. Extremely difficult to hear. There is reference in the NY Times review to the "sound design" and the kids and traffic. Why the volume you couldn't be adjusted for the actors is a mystery. Very disappointing, especially given that what little we could decipher made us want to read the play...though we would have enjoyed hearing it as it's supposed to be.

We loved the play but left rather confused about the red-lit boxed soliloquys about the apocalypse -- couldn't quite figure out what they were supposed to reprsent. Was the character supposed to be nuts? In the backyard that character shouts RAGE, though she otherwise is "well behaved" -- is that a clue?

Anybody reading this, got any idea what those visions of horror were supposed to be?

I loved the actors -- they were superb! But I, too, didn't "get" the connection between the action on stage and the soliloquies, except the obvious: yes, there are these two contrasting worlds. If one of the women had quoted a new item, or even had a newspaper, it would have helped bring the two worlds together. Otherwise, what was that about?

One of the gems in a terrific theatre season, along with Man of Good Hope, and Tempest at St. Anne's and The Encounter (Complicite). This was a joyful way to get to Armageddon. The ladies were superb (heard every word in Row J). The writing was terrific. I'd love to see a male companion piece. Thanks, BAM once again for bringing us the world's outstanding works of theatre.

So glad we saw this amazing work. i wish I could see it a second time. I think I would get a lot more out of it second time around when I wouldn't be concentrating so hard to catch every word. So much going on at so many levels within the 50 minutes! An all too accurate reflection of our lives ...

Churchill is a master, and a prophet, giving words to our internal struggles with external horrors. Then the moment comes when the play transcends the words themselves. I feel human again after seeing this play. Kudos to the actors. Thank you, BAM, for supporting this work.

I could not follow many of the details of what was being said, so I left feeling a lack of connection. I did come away with a general sense that the women are talking about relatively superficial things with each other (TV programs, songs, children), but during their soliloquies they were expressing what was REALLY going on in their lives.

This left me with the impression the play was saying we are not being honest with each other. These women were long time friends and yet strangers to each other, not able to talk honestly. This general idea is one I find relevant to our society today and one we need to urgently address. How do we talk mere honestly?

Actors are wonderful, play is beguiling, production not so much. Best visual for me was before curtain. Intriguing fence with sliver of roofline behind it. Secrets to unfold? Too bad the back yard, neon frame and lighting didn't support transitions. And even in row G, it was hard to hear at times.

I love when the banal leads to something extraordinary. Alas, it didn't this time.

Caryl Churchill's work is always polarizing and really challenges an audience to make themselves vulnerable. It's definitely not everyone's cup of tea. However for me her work is among the most vital and penetrating of the last 40 years. This is the 11th of her plays I've seen of about 20 or so productions. I find her continuing to refine and distill her artistry in a fashion similar to Beckett's: returning to an essential theme (the easy slippage into debilitating horror of existence) and works becoming shorter and more compact, playing with form.

This production was superlative in every way, and this from someone sat in the balcony. The performances, the design, the directorial clarity, the matter-of-fact brutality of Churchill's text. I was completely gutted. Riveted. I had to stop myself from literally crying out at one point.

Moments like this are why I see dozens of plays a year but that are ultimately quite rare today. I haven't felt so moved in a performance since Journey's End in 2007. I feel bad for those who disliked it. I think they perhaps closed themselves off from a profound experience.

The layers of existential experience (both spoken and "unspoken") in the air during this seemingly everyday chat among four women in a backyard made for a slyly powerful evening of theater. I especially enjoyed how the dialogue was like real speech patterns: half sentences … words trailing off … beating around the bush … then suddenly shockingly direct. The inner dialogue was fascinating, too, reminding me that we never truly know what another is thinking. In the background of this lovely chat in the waning afternoon sunlight is the inevitable "end." No matter how we each imagine (and fear) the final days or our own demise, it is always there — sometimes a vague and freeform anxiety, sometimes imagined in minute detail. (I can totally relate to that free-floating terror these days!)

Unfortunately, I was disappointed with Escaped Alone. Found the script to be disjointed and the acting deliberately stilted without a compelling reason in the narrative -- had a gloss of profundity where nothing deeper was to be found. (I do like apocalyptic visions, and sensed a subversion of that form, but in an inconsistent way.) The truths that were revealed over the story were interesting but not compelling. The set, however, was phenomenal, and I felt the actresses made the best of the material they were given. (The cat monologue was especially disturbing.)

My hopes were high but this did not rise to the great level of BAM programming that I have come to expect. I like that you take risks though and hope BAM continues to do so -- and you should certainly support more women and diverse playwrights.